Double standards here and there:
Hypocrisy raises its ugly head in Israel and the U.S.

JUDGING OURSELVES AND OTHERS is a tricky business. If you think of yourself
as basically good (as most of us do) and those that threaten your interests or
safety as basically bad, you tend to judge yourself gently. And we discount
our bad deeds — and those whom we support — in the name of supposed good
motives.

Thus is it ever with nations as with individuals. When it comes to making
deals we shouldn't make, or condoning things we shouldn't condone, or saying
things we shouldn't say, hypocrisy is rife these days in both Jerusalem and
Washington.

Torture is still torture

One of the most troubling instances of such hypocrisy is the current case
before the High Court in Israel in which a human rights group is seeking to
ban torture of terrorism suspects. According to B'Tselem, approximately 850
Palestinian Arabs implicated in terror activities are tortured every year.
The torture, which includes sleep deprivation and "violent shaking," has
received official sanction from Israeli courts in the past. They have accepted the
notion that "moderate physical pressure" under specific conditions ought to
be allowed if by doing so, the Israeli security services could extract
information from a suspect that could prevent a terrorist attack and save
lives.

Despite our abhorrence for such methods, that is a reasonable argument,
since
the state's obligation to protect its citizens in that case outweighs the
terrorist's rights. But once such a procedure is sanctioned — not just in
the
margins of the law but codified in published judgements — can we prevent it
from spreading to other parts of the legal system? Legal history shows that
it
cannot.

What's worse, Yuval Ginbar of B'Tselem told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency,
"Torture of Palestinian detainees is routine and is a bureaucratic
procedure."

That's the rub. Israel's secret warriors are engaged in a dirty war against
evil, brutal terrorists who will do anything to advance their goal of
killing as many Jews as possible and destroying Israel. But can friends of Israel
pretend that the violence of torture is not seeping into the whole justice
system? Inevitably, torture influences everything else the police do.

That's why Israeli police brutality against peaceful demonstrators on the
streets has become routine. It happened to right-wing opponents of the Oslo
accords who demonstrated during the Rabin/Peres government and it has
happened
again to people on the other side of the spectrum. And who can forget the
police riot last summer when Israeli cops manhandled Conservative Jews who
wanted to pray on the Kotel Plaza in Jerusalem? When police brutality
becomes
routine in one sector of the justice system, it is virtually impossible to
prevent the brutalization of the rest.

Though we are right to decry the hypocrisy of such "impartial" judges of
Israel like the United Nations (which is largely silent about far greater
abuses going on in the rest of the Middle East under tyrannical regimes),
that doesn't excuse the silence of friends of Israel on this topic. I don't care
for the political agenda of many who back B'Tselem, but in this instance
they are right. Though Israel is judged by a different and higher standard than
its neighbors, torture is still torture and is wrong in all but the most
egregious circumstances.

Oh, that nasty Newt

Yet another entry in the annals of hypocrisy would be the way the White
House
and the media have come down on the latest set of pilgrims to the Middle
East:
Newt Gingrich and the Congressional Republicans. The Speaker of the House
led
a delegation from the House to Israel this week, and before he even set foot
in the Land of Israel or opened his big mouth to say a word, he was accused
of provoking violence!

What did the ever obnoxious Newt do? He merely expressed a wish to visit the
proposed site of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. You remember that embassy?
It's the one that presidential candidates promise to move to Israel's
capital
but which remains in Tel Aviv because of Arab pressure and State Department
timidity. The Congress voted a couple of years ago to set a time limit for
the
move, but everyone knows that Mr. Clinton (the "best friend Israel ever had
in
the White House") will never allow that to happen because such a step would
be
an acknowledgment of Israel's undivided sovereignty in its capital. And we
wouldn't want to disabuse the leaders of the would-be state of Palestine of
their dreams of getting a piece of the city, would we?

Newt also had the temerity to place the blame for the peace process
breakdown
squarely where it belongs: Not on Benjamin Netanyahu, who is the whipping
boy
of both Washington and the press, but on the head of Yasser Arafat, who has
violated the Oslo Accords with impunity.

For these statements, Newt was pilloried by the world press and pressured by
the White House to avoid even visiting the future site of the embassy. What
a
joke. Though Newt usually has little trouble getting himself in trouble,
this
time he was the victim of the usual Israel double standard: Tell the truth
about the abuses and lies of the Palestinian Authority and you are an
extremist. Speak up for Israel's democratically elected government and you
are
an obstacle to peace.

Bill and Bibi's China tango

While the Middle East is home to some of the most egregious instances of
hypocrisy, the Far East is no slouch either. And to prove it, the leaders of
both Israel and the United States are heading to China. Though some might
think Benjamin Netanyahu's trip to Beijing is motivated by a desire to
escape
from his latest bout of bad publicity (in this instance, a New Yorker
magazine
article, in which his media advisor is quoted as saying aloud what everyone
else says privately about Netanyahu's own character and controversial
spouse),
the tour was planned a long time ago. It is part of Israel's ongoing
campaign
to get their share of profits from military technology sales to the world's
most populous country.

Just as the government of the U.S. demeans itself by toadying to Communist
dictators, so too do the democratic leaders of Israel. And just as Bill
Clinton will stain the honor of the United States by consenting to take part
in a ceremony at the site of the Tiananmen Square massacre, so too will
Netanyahu. Some will make excuses that small countries cannot afford a moral
foreign policy. My response is that countries that want others to treat them
morally (as Israel has often not been treated) should hold themselves to a
higher standard. Too bad, Israel won't.

As for Mr. Clinton, this one-time advocate of human rights will place the
seal
of infamy on his record with his upcoming visit to China. As charges swirl
around the campaign contributions from Chinese officials and American
companies who have exported illegal missile technology, the best defense I
can
offer for the president is this: I don't believe he had to be bribed to
carry
out an immoral foreign policy which placed the China trade above national
security and human rights at the bottom of our national priorities.

Everything we know about the man says it came naturally. Hypocrisy
rules.

5/26/98: Hartford Seminary tangle points to bigger issues5/22/98:The importance of being Bibi5/14/98:
The ‘dream palace' of the anti-Zionists:
Hartford Seminary controversy has historic roots4/26/98: All-rightniks versus the alarmists:
Focussing on the Jewish bottom line4/13/98:Of ends and means and victims 4/5/98: Hang up on Albright3/29/98: Bigshots or activists?: Clinton's three clerics return from China3/27/98: Will American Jews help Clinton push Israel into a corner?3/22/98: Anti-Semitism then and now3/15/98: Still searching for Jews at the opera3/11/98: Remembering Eric Breindel3/8/98: Getting lost in history3/5/98: Follow the money to Hamas2/22/98: Re-writing "Anne Frank" - A distorted legacy
2/15/98: Religious persecution is still a Jewish issue
2/6/98: A lost cause remembered (the failure of the Bund)
2/1/98: Economic aid is not in Israel's interest
1/25/98: Jews are news, and a fair shake for Israel is hard to find